Copyright is Out of Sight

[Giggleton]

Originally Posted by HansTWN

Why must people always have the latest bestsellers?

Because those are the best ones to read?



This has been and always will be about my rights to copy your work and disseminate it to whoever I choose, for whatever reason I desire.

Censorship by any other name, is still a restriction on the right to think.

[HansTWN]

Originally Posted by Giggleton

Because those are the best ones to read?



This has been and always will be about my rights to copy your work and disseminate it to whoever I choose, for whatever reason I desire.

Censorship by any other name, is still a restriction on the right to think.

Try using your right to think. Copyright isn't censorship. It is about protecting people's rights. Look it up in the dictionary. The rights of those who contributed something to society. No, getting unlimited freebies is not a right. Just as others have no right to demand you work for them for free.

[Giggleton]

Originally Posted by HansTWN

Try using your right to think. Copyright isn't censorship. It is about protecting people's rights. Look it up in the dictionary. The rights of those who contributed something to society. No, getting unlimited freebies is not a right. Just as others have no right to demand you work for them for free.

I am not demanding anything from you when I copy your work, I am simply exercising my right to think.

You would be within your rights to ask me nicely to stop, but I would hope you wouldn't demand of me to do anything.

[Mortis]

Then exercise your mind and think it through, copying someone else's work and distributing it, is theft, simply put you are stealing something, wether it is a mans car or his life's work, it is theft.

[HamsterRage]

Originally Posted by Mortis

Then exercise your mind and think it through, copying someone else's work and distributing it, is theft, simply put you are stealing something, wether it is a mans car or his life's work, it is theft.

I think we've been around the block more than a few times on this. Copyright infringement is NOT theft, it's copyright infringement. Calling it theft and stealing is NOT a rabbit hole we need this thread to go down.

[Mortis]

Ok, to me taking something I haven't paid for is theft, call it what you will.

[Giggleton]

Originally Posted by Mortis

Ok, to me taking something I haven't paid for is theft, call it what you will.

As spellbanisher mentioned above, the components in our electronics are bought with blood.

Distributing knowledge to any and all is the least we can do to honor the memory of those who allow us to do so.

[HamsterRage]

Originally Posted by Mortis

Ok, to me taking something I haven't paid for is theft, call it what you will.

Except, of course, that with copyright infringement you haven't "taken" anything. So I think we can both agree that no theft has occurred, not even in spirit.

From what I've seen, people insist on characterizing copyright infringement as "theft" because "copyright infringement" just doesn't sound evil enough. If you can get people to equate it to theft, then you're half way to getting them to agreeing that it's just plain bad.

Which would be fine if it the issue was really that simple. But the fact that we're 40-odd pages into this thread should be a wee hint that it's a little more complicated than that.

[Mortis]

Actually I don't think its any more complicated than that, but then I'm pretty simple and some things I believe are black and white. I haven't read anything to change my mind about it.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by Mortis

Actually I don't think its any more complicated than that, but then I'm pretty simple and some things I believe are black and white. I haven't read anything to change my mind about it.

Yes, but that everything is black and white does not mean that you call all crimes murder. There is a reason to have different terms for different crimes.

[Mortis]

Originally Posted by tompe

Yes, but that everything is black and white does not mean that you call all crimes murder. There is a reason to have different terms for different crimes.

Where do you get murder from theft? I understand you are not stealing anything tangible, but what if you saw the plans for a great plane and built it, calling it your own design, you stole the idea right?

Copyright is there to protect ideas. Granted copyright isn't as black and white as I am trying to make it, but it is no where as complicated as this thread is trying to make it.

Sorry if I don't understand how copyright is harming education or causing all evils in the world, I really don't get it.

Nuff said

[Giggleton]

Originally Posted by Mortis

I understand you are not stealing anything tangible, but what if you saw the plans for a great plane and built it, calling it your own design, you stole the idea right?

Copyright is there to protect ideas. Granted copyright isn't as black and white as I am trying to make it, but it is no where as complicated as this thread is trying to make it.

No, it's not complicated at all. If there is nothing to steal, there can be no thieves.

What do you think the creator of the universe would have to say about all of this? Are we not all copying creation with everything that we do? We don't have to go to the beginning of the universe when arguing for the abolishment of copyright, but we can.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by Mortis

Where do you get murder from theft? I understand you are not stealing anything tangible, but what if you saw the plans for a great plane and built it, calling it your own design, you stole the idea right?

The point was that they are different crimes. Why do you think we do not call killing people murder and stealing things murder? It is because they are different and it is useful to distinguish between the different crimes. And we have two different crimes: theft and copyright infringement. Why insist on calling copyright infrimgement theft when they are different crimes?

[pietrocrazy]

Originally Posted by Mortis

Actually I don't think its any more complicated than that, but then I'm pretty simple and some things I believe are black and white. I haven't read anything to change my mind about it.

When you see nothing but black and white, you miss out on most of the details. The world is full of nuance, and there's no reason that our opinions should not be nuanced as well.

[HamsterRage]

Originally Posted by Mortis

I understand you are not stealing anything tangible, but what if you saw the plans for a great plane and built it, calling it your own design, you stole the idea right?

Well...no. The idea is still right where it was before so no theft occurred.

What I can say, is that it's fairly easy to say that there was something ethically wrong (and most certainly illegal) if the plane was then sold or used for profit. However, if the plane was never, say, fueled up and flown it would be much harder to find something ethically wrong.

To my mind, that's why there are separate laws covering theft and copyright infringement. It's not black and white, and the greyness isn't something you can just ignore.

Copyright is there to protect ideas.

Not the way I see it. Copyright is there to protect a person's ability to profit from their ideas. Is that a subtle detail? I don't think so.

Nuff said

No way!!!

You don't get to say, "There you go, I win!" and shut down the thread. The Internet doesn't work that way.

It's always the most persistent, pig-headed jerk (like me) that gets the last word in.